IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI

th

ON THE 8 OF DECEMBER, 2025 WRIT PETITION No. 47475 of 2025 YASH MISHRA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS Appearance:

Shri Anand Agrawal - Advocate for the petitioner Shri Raghav Shrivastava - Government Advocate for the respondents State.

ORDER This petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed seeking following reliefs:-

''अ. यािचकाकता (cid:9)को यो(cid:11)यता अनुसार (cid:16)योगशाला सहायक/(cid:16)योगशाला अट(cid:22)ड(cid:22)ट/ या

अ(cid:24)य समक(cid:26) पद पर मय सभी लाभ के अनुकंपा िनयु(cid:33)(cid:34) (cid:16)दान कर(cid:22)।

ब. अ(cid:24)य (cid:24)यायोिचत सहायता जो भी उिचत हो यािचकाकता (cid:9)को (cid:16)दान करने का क(cid:39)

कर(cid:22)।''

It is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that in identical circumstances, the Co-ordinate Bench has considered the case of similarly situated employee and passed the order dated 01/05/2025 in W.P. No.15385 of 2025 (Shushan Shelke Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others). Petitioner is identically situated, therefore prays for similar relief as has been granted in the case of Shushan Shelke (supra).

Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the matter is squarely covered by the order passed in the case of Shushan Shelke (supra).

He prays for disposal of the matter in terms of said order.

His statement is placed on record.

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Shushan Shelke (supra) has passed the following order:-

"This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment of order dated 9/4/2025 passed by respondent 4, whereby petitioner's application for grant of appointment on compassionate basis due to death of his father on 22/11/2024, who was working as Sthai Karmi in respondents' establishment, has been rejected.

2. Parties are at consensus that the present petition can be disposed off in terms of the order dated 24/06/2022 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Ashish Soni vs. Rani Durgavti Vishvavidhyalaya, in W.P. No.11742/2021, wherein following order was passed:-

"The petitioner has called in question the order dated 01-02-2021(Annexure P/10), by which, the application for appointment on compassionate basis has been turned down while holding that the petitioner is classified as 'Sthai karmi' pursuant to Circular dated 07- 10-2016 and since, the Policy pertaining to conferment of benefit of compassionate appointment, does not contain any provision as regards extension of benefit to the dependents of an deceased employee, who was classified as 'Sthai Karmi", pursuant to Circular dated 07-10-2016, thus, the application of the petitioner cannot be acceded to.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though, he was initially appointed on daily rated basis lateron his services were regularised however, the order of regularisation was thereafter, cancelled by the University vide order dated 30-08-2014. Lateron, the Department of General Administration, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh issued a Circular dated 07-10-2016, by which, a decision was taken by the Government to regularise the services of the daily rated employee while classifying them into three categories namely- Un- skilled/Semi-skilled/Skilled with pay-scale as described in paragraph-1.2 of the Circular. Accordingly, in pursuance of that Circular, the father of the petitioner was classified as 'Sthai karmi'. The father of the petitioner died while in service on 30-12-2019. Upon death of his father, the petitioner herein moved an application for compassionate appointment which has been turned down vide order dated

01-02-2021.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no embargo in the Policy pertaining to compassionate appointment dated 29-09- 2014 that dependents of a deceased employee, who was classified as 'Sthai karmi', cannot be considered for appointment on compassionate basis. Therefore, the counsel submits that since the services of the fa